Unified interface and tracing tool for network function virtualization architecture

ABSTRACT

A system instantiates a unified interface for a telecommunications network including a Network Function Virtualization (NFV) architecture of an IP multimedia subsystem (IMS) with multiple Virtual Network Functions (VNFs) that each have multiple component VNFs. The system instantiates a tracing tool configured to evaluate performance of the IMS in response to execution of a test case, which includes a test script to test a computing product and where the performance of the IMS is based on packets captured concurrently from VNFs. The test script causes capture and analysis of parameters extracted from packets of the VNFs. In response to completing the test case, the system reports test results indicating the performance of the IMS relative to pass/fail criteria, where the test results are presented through the unified interface.

BACKGROUND

Product development in the telecommunication industry follows rigorousstandards to ensure stability, protocol adherence and quality, whichresults in reliable products and associated systems. While this modelworked well in the past, it inevitably led to long product cycles, aslow pace of development, and reliance on proprietary or customhardware. The rise of significant competition in communication servicesfrom fast-moving organizations operating at large scale on the Internethas spurred service providers to improve product development models.

A network function virtualization (NFV) model is a network architecturethat virtualizes classes of network node functions into building blocksthat may connect, or chain together, to create communication services. Avirtual network function (VNF) is a software implementation of a networkfunction that can include one or more virtual machines running differentsoftware and processes, on top of servers, switches and storage devices,or even a cloud computing infrastructure, instead of having customhardware for each network function. For example, a virtual SessionBorder Controller (SBC) could be deployed to protect a network withoutthe typical cost and complexity of obtaining and installing physicalnetwork protection units.

An NFV infrastructure is the totality of hardware and softwarecomponents on which VNFs are deployed. The NFV infrastructure includesvirtual and physical processing and storage resources, andvirtualization software. A Network Function Virtualization Managementand Orchestration (NFV-MANO) architecture includes the collection of allfunctional blocks, data repositories used by the blocks, and referencepoints and interfaces through which the functional blocks exchangeinformation for the purpose of managing and orchestrating VNFs. TheNFV-MANO includes management components and virtualization softwareoperating on a hardware controller. The NFV also system hascarrier-grade features to manage and monitor components, to recover fromfailures, and to provide security.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

Detailed descriptions of implementations of the present invention willbe described and explained through the use of the accompanying drawings.

FIG. 1 is a flowchart that illustrates a process for testing a newproduct on a telecommunications network

FIG. 2 is a block diagram that illustrates a Network FunctionVirtualization Management and Orchestration (NFV-MANO) architecture inwhich at least some test operations described herein can be implemented.

FIG. 3 is a block diagram that illustrates an IP multimedia subsystem(IMS) architecture in which at least some test operations describedherein are implemented.

FIG. 4 is a flowchart that illustrates an example of a logic flowincluding a Voice over Long-Term Evolution (VoLTE)-to-VoLTE callconfigured to verify a new product.

FIG. 5 is a flowchart that illustrates a process of a unified interfaceand tracing tool for testing a new product on a virtual distributednetwork.

FIG. 6 is a flowchart that illustrates a process of a unified query toolfor querying a virtual network for subscriber information.

FIG. 7 is a flowchart that illustrates a process for testing a newproduct based on enhanced calling or messaging communications based onsimulated services.

FIG. 8 is a block diagram that illustrates an example of a computersystem in which at least some operations described herein can beimplemented.

The technologies described herein will become more apparent to thoseskilled in the art from studying the Detailed Description in conjunctionwith the drawings. Embodiments or implementations describing aspects ofthe invention are illustrated by way of example, and the same referencescan indicate similar elements. While the drawings depict variousimplementations for the purpose of illustration, those skilled in theart will recognize that alternative implementations can be employedwithout departing from the principles of the present technologies.Accordingly, while specific implementations are shown in the drawings,the technology is amenable to various modifications.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

The disclosed technology includes testing tools such as a unifiedinterface and tracing tool for distributed Virtual Network Functions(VNFs) in a telecommunications network. The unified interface andtracing tool improve over existing tools to detect an anomaly andidentify the root cause of the anomaly at different levels of thenetwork including the VNFs and their sub-functions (e.g., VNF1, VNF2,VNF3 instances). The tracing tool is accessible through the unifiedinterface to trace internal logs, network logs, or debug logs for eachVNF or sub-function. The tracing tool can capture log entries from eachof the different types of logs at each VNF or sub-function. Hence, auser can use the unified interface to access each VNF or sub-functionand find the root cause of an issue. The unified interface includes aunified query tool to receive and process a single query that is used tointerrogate any or all VNFs or sub-functions simultaneously rather thanrequire separate query entries.

The disclosed testing tools include software or hardware componentsconfigured to operate as part of a debugging framework that implementstesting procedures. The testing tools can capture data indicative ofperformance parameters. A test procedure can monitor any number ofdifferent types of parameters, which vary depending on the configurationand settings of a test case. For example, networks employ various typesof software components to deliver services like routing and switching,VoIP broadband access, and the like. The disclosed tools enable uniformprobing and analysis of the virtual network components at a level ofgranularity not found in conventional testing tools. As such, forexample, the disclosed testing tools enable identification of rootcauses of errors that can arise at different levels of a virtualarchitecture such as at separately instantiated sub-components (e.g.,sub-functions) within virtual components.

Testing New Products

FIG. 1 is a flowchart that illustrates a process 100 for testing a newproduct (e.g., updated product, changed product) on a telecommunicationsnetwork. At 102, a test case of a test suite is executed. In practice, atest case mimics a real-world scenario that a user can experience suchas a voice call or a message chat. Based on the results of the testcase, a test engineer can certify the product. The test case can includea test script that is configured to quantify performance of a newproduct (e.g., software or hardware device) on a telecommunicationsnetwork. For example, the test script can define or call one or morelogic flows (e.g., call flows) between two or more endpoint devices onthe network, to test how software or hardware components of the networkbehave in response as the logic flows execute. An example of a logicflow includes a Voice over Long-Term Evolution (VoLTE)-to-VoLTE call.VoLTE is a high-speed wireless communication standard for mobileterminals, including Internet of things (IoT) devices and wearables,though the present system is not limited to voice communications+.

At 104, test data (e.g., results) are generated based on the executedtest script. The test data can include values for one or more parametersassociated with one or more network nodes. For example, invehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) communications, there are about 26 logic flowsrelated to the IP multimedia subsystem (IMS) core, and about 9parameters per logic flow. The disclosed unified interface and tracingtool enables evaluating all 234 parameters concurrently. The parameterscan include measurements that indicate performance of network node orrelated component involved in a test case. The parameters are set forthe test script, which is configured for testing the new product.Examples of test data include the instances or frequency that the calldrops off or performance parameters relative to a threshold quality ofservice (e.g., magnitude or frequency below the threshold). Likewise,the test can set parameters for hardware components such as userequipment (UE) that have different capabilities. The capabilities can betested on different networks to address potential problems beforelarge-scale deployment.

At 106, the test data are validated by comparing against expected data.For example, a test script can define parameters to validate the testitself, such as embedded errors. The parameters used to validate thetest can aid to determine whether deviations in test data are attributedto a faulty test or are actual errors. The remaining parameters can setbenchmarks for expected results from the network components and theproduct being tested. In one example, test data can include values ofparameters configured for testing a specific product. The test data arecompared against expected values for the VoLTE-to-VoLTE call todetermine or infer errors based on the performance of the network.

At 108, validated test data are parsed to develop insights aboutanomalies, errors, or performance of the network. For example, test datathat are associated with one component of the network can be separatedfrom test data that are associated with another component of thenetwork. The validated test data can be partitioned based on types ofnetwork components, their relative locations in the network, frequencyof types of data, or any other measure that is useful to provideinsights about the performance of the network relative to the newproduct being tested.

At 110, a summary of the test data is generated to provide insightsabout the performance of the network based on the test case. Forexample, the summary can include human-readable information indicativeof whether any components of the network generated errors in response tothe test case and the frequency or magnitude of those errors. Thesummary can be based on aggregate values or portions of the test datathat enable a test engineer to determine the performance of the networkin response to the product being tested.

Network Function Virtualization

Network Function Virtualization (NFV) is a network architecture conceptof virtualization to virtualize entire classes of network node functionsinto building blocks that may connect to create communication services.The NFV architecture includes VNF nodes that are distributed asfunctional blocks of a network. Each VNF can include one or more virtualmachines or containers running different software and processes (e.g.,VNF1, VNF2, VNF3 sub-functions), on top of standard high-volume servers,switches and storage devices, or even cloud computing infrastructure,instead of having custom hardware appliances for each network function.As such, for example, a virtual Session Border Controller (SBC) could bedeployed to protect a network without the typical cost and complexity ofobtaining and installing physical network protection units.

In one example, functional blocks are components of a core network suchas an IP multimedia subsystem (IMS) of a telecommunications network.That is, the IMS component nodes are implemented as VNFs in an NFVarchitecture. Examples of applications that can be virtualized as VNFsinclude a Telephony Application Server (TAS) and a Call Session ControlFunction (CSCF). Like many VNFs, a TAS has sub-functions including avirtual load balancer, session manager, and Diameter manager.

To build highly reliable and scalable services, the NFV architecture caninstantiate VNFs, monitor them, repair them, and bill for renderedservices. The NFV architecture enables dynamic scaling of resources toaccommodate subscriber growth, redundancy, and unforeseen problems.These carrier-grade features are allocated to an orchestration layer ofthe architecture in order to provide high availability and security, andlow operation and maintenance costs. The orchestration layer can manageVNFs irrespective of underlying technology. For example, theorchestration layer can manage a VNF for an SBC running on VMWAREVSPHERE just as well as a VNF of an IMS running on a kernel-basedvirtual machine (KVM). The disclosed technology addresses a significantgap in testing tools for NFV architectures due to each VNF having uniqueand independent functions.

FIG. 2 is a block diagram that illustrates an NFV management andorchestration architectural framework (NFV-MANO) platform 200 in whichaspects of the invention can operate. The NFV-MANO platform 200 can bebuilt with a cloud native and web-scale architecture. The NFV-MANOplatform 200 allows operators to control VNF assets while including NFVinfrastructure features for traffic aggregation, load balancing andend-to-end (E2E) service assurance with analytics, monitoring, andorchestration.

A MANO portion 202 includes an NFV orchestrator (NFVO) 204 coupled to aVNF manager (VNFM) 206, a software integration layer 208, and avirtualized infrastructure manager (VIM) 210. The NFVO 204 coordinatesthe resources and networks needed to setup cloud-based services andapplications. This process uses a variety of virtualization software andindustry-standard hardware. The NFV defines standards for compute,storage, and networking resources that can be used to build the VNF 212.As illustrated, the VNF 212 has several instances of an elementmanagement system (EMS) on top of several instances of an VNF (VNF1,VNF2, VNF3) that resides on respective virtual machines (VMs). Here, theVNF1, VNF2, and VNF2 are sub-functions of VNF 212. An EMS is responsiblefor the FCAPS (fault, configuration, accounting, performance andsecurity management) of the functional part of a VNF. The NFV-MANOplatform 200 also includes an OSS 214 that includes a collection ofsystems/applications that a service provider uses to operate. The datacenter 216 includes a hypervisor/virtualization layer on top of ahardware networking infrastructure of compute, storage, and networkingcomponents.

The VNFM 206 works in concert with the other NFV-MANO functional blocks,the VIM 210 and the NFVO 204, to help standardize the functions ofvirtual networking and increase the interoperability of software-definednetworking elements. These components, as standardized by ETSI, providea standard framework for building NFV applications.

Functional Testing

Functional testing evaluates an NFV architecture to ensure that each VNFoperates in conformance with specified requirements. In general,functionality is tested by feeding input and verifying the output tocheck what the VNF does. Each VNF is tested to verify that theoutput/result is as expected. The testing may involve checking APIs,database, security, user interface, client/server applications and otherfunctionality of each VNF being tested. The internal structure, code,and performance are not considered in prior forms of functional testing.The purpose of functional testing is primarily to ensure usability,accessibility and requirement specs testing. It verifies that a newproduct will function properly and optimally on a network.

The disclosed technology enables concurrent testing of functional blocksand sub-functions to readily detect and anomaly (e.g., error) andidentify a root cause. The sub-functions can be probed concurrently togenerate test data stored in separate or unified files. As such, a testengineer can check test results across functional blocks andsub-functions at the same time to develop new insights. Moreover, thetest data of the functional blocks and sub-functions are accessiblethrough a unified interface coupled to the tracing tool despiteoperating using different protocols.

A packet probe employed by, or integrated into, the tracing tool canperform packet capture to enable inspection and debugging. As such, thetracing tool executes a test that enables inspection and debugging basedon collected packet traffic. The debugging is based on test data such asparameter values for a test case, which can be defined by a testengineer as described earlier. The tracing tool can inspect theunderlying functions of a VNF to identify the root source of performanceissues. In contrast, existing packet analyzers such as Wireshark or IrisSession Analyzer (ISA) probe for packets only at a high-level such thatthe root cause of anomalies remains unknown. The existing packetanalyzers cannot pinpoint the root cause of an anomaly in an NFVarchitecture in part because of the numerous functional blocks withsub-functions that dynamically instantiate independently.

The disclosed technology can probe sub-functions to identify a rootcause. The collected packets of each sub-function are stored in aseparate file or a unified file that provides human-readable informationthat can be presented to a user through the unified interface. Thus, thedisclosed technology mitigates the operational inefficiencies of usingseparate interfaces or instances thereof to view test data of VNFsequentially.

The unified interface and tracing tool are also configured to automatetesting across multiple virtual functions and include a unified querymechanism for receiving and processing a single query across any numberof the functions. As such, a user can input one query on the unifiedinterface, which applies the query concurrently to one or morefunctional blocks or sub-functions of an NFV architecture. As such,multiple or all the separate functions are concurrently interrogatedrather than requiring individual queries for each separate functionalblock or sub-function.

FIG. 3 is a block diagram that illustrates an IMS architecture 300 inwhich at least some test operations described herein are implemented.The IMS architecture 300 is designed to enable network operators toprovide a wide range of real-time, packet-based services and to tracktheir use in a way that allows both traditional time-based charging aswell as packet and service-based charging. As shown, the IMSarchitecture 300 includes a distributed network of functional blocksthat each represent, for example, an application function. An example ofa functional block is a VNF that can include smaller blocks representingsub-functions (e.g., micro-services) or other logical functions.

The IMS provides a wide range of SBC, including call access control,reachability, and security. The IMS has a framework for deployment ofboth basic calling services and enhanced services, including multimediamessaging, web integration, presence-based services, and push-to-talk.The IMS also draws on the traditional telecommunications experience ofguaranteed Quality of Service (QoS), flexible charging mechanisms (e.g.,time-based, call-collect, premium rates), and lawful interceptcompliance.

The IMS architecture 300 defines many common components (e.g., callcontrol and configuration storage) such that that less development workis required to create a new service as the existing infrastructure canbe reused. The use of standardized interfaces increase competitionbetween suppliers thereby preventing operators from being locked into asingle supplier's proprietary interfaces. As a result, the IMS enablesnew services to be rolled out quickly and inexpensively, compared withthe traditional monolithic design of telephony services.

The illustrated blocks (large and small) represent logical componentsthat are associated with underlying hardware. To debug any of thelogical components, the packet probe taps into a component to capturelogs of the component and/or its different sub-components. In oneexample, the larger functional blocks represent logical virtual nodes(LVN) that include one or more sub-functions (e.g., micro-services).Examples include compute, OSS, VSS systems, and lifecycle managers. Asshown, communications of the IMS architecture 300 include IMS sessionsignaling (dashed line) and user plane data (solid line). In theillustrated example, the communications include packet traffic that isgenerated as part of logic flows during test cases, which can be probedto detect an anomaly and identify the source of the anomaly. The logicflows can represent operations such as a file transfer, text chat, orother forms of communications of different protocols.

As shown, the communications of the logic flows traverse a Call SessionControl Function (CSCF) 302 and a Telephony Application Server (TAS)304. The CSCF 302 provides the central control function in the IMS coreto setup, establish, modify, and tear down multimedia sessions. The CSCF302 is distributed across three types of sub-functional elements basedon the specialized function that they perform. Specifically, the CSCF302 is an example of a functional block with sub-functions including theServing-CSCF (S-CSCF) 306, Interrogating-CSCF (I-CSCF) 308, andProxy-CSCF (P-CSCF) 310 that are connected to other functional blocksand sub-functions.

The TAS 304 supports multiple application servers for telephonyservices, includes a back-to-back SIP user agent that maintains the callstate, and contains service logic which provides the basic callprocessing services such as digit analysis, routing, call setup, callwaiting, call forwarding, conferencing, and the like. The TAS 304 isanother example of a functional block that has sub-functions includingthe Session Initiation Protocol Application Server (SIP-AS) 312, IMSSwitching Function (IMS-SSF) 314, and Open Service Access ServiceCapability Server (OSA-SCS) 316 that are connected to other functionalblocks and sub-functions.

The CSCF 302 and TAS 304 are examples of VNFs that can be tested againsta new product as part of one or more logic flow(s) that interact withmultiple nodes of the IMS architecture 300. In one example, a test casedefines parameters for analyzing the performance of VNFs such as theCSCF 302, the TAS 304, and their respective sub-functions. In oneexample, a new device (e.g., UE with updated software) is tested tovalidate on the IMS architecture 300. A test process can include one ormore separate test scripts that each invoke a logic flow and packetprobe to analyze test data that is used to collectively validateperformance of the new product relative to the IMS architecture 300.

A computer system communicatively couples to the IMS and runs one ormore test cases to test a new product. The test cases include differenttest scripts to execute logic flows and measure certain parameters ofthe IMS, compare expected parameter values against measured values, andgenerate performance results for the IMS and/or new product based on thedifferences. A packet probe is used to capture packets of the IMS whilethe test is being conducted. Specifically, the test cases are configuredsuch that the packet probe is used to analyze performance based onnumerous parameters associated with functional blocks and sub-functionsand measure corresponding values. The collective test data indicates hownodes of the IMS architecture 300 react to the new product based on thelogic flows of test cases. As such, a test engineer can detect an issuein the IMS relative to a logic flow for the new product.

The issue can include an anomaly such as an error that is detected basedon captured and analyzed packets. Examples of issues include call drops,call quality issues, or reductions in Key Performance Indicators (KPIs).To debug an issue, the packet probe can identify the root cause of theissue by performing packet capture at different levels of the NFVarchitecture including the VNFs (e.g., based on session signaling, userplane data) and sub-functions (e.g., micro-services data). As such, thepacket probe offers visibility into VNFs to pinpoint a sub-function as aroot cause, which is necessary to resolve the issue.

The unified interface and tracing tool can operate on functional blocksand sub-functions concurrently to identify a root cause of an issue. Inone example, the unified interface includes a user interface (UI) thatenables interactions between users and an NFV architecture. Theinteractions allow users to manage and control test cases from theuser-end, whilst the NFV architecture simultaneously feeds backinformation that aids in decision-making. Other implementations of theunified interface include a graphical UI (GUI), command line interface,or backend interface. Thus, a user can input parameters for test casesthrough the unified interface and view test data.

The unified interface allows for broad and uniform access acrossfunctional blocks and sub-functions associated with underlying computeand storage components. In operation, the sub-functions communicate witheach other in a manner that is not plainly detectable by conventionalinterfaces outside of each functional block. In contrast, the disclosedunified interface enables interactions with a packet probe havingtracing capabilities across functional blocks and sub-functions througha network orchestrator.

As a result, the disclosed technology enables lower-level analysis ofsub-functions within functional blocks to provide new insights intoperformance issues. For example, consider a functional block that has Nmicro-functions. The packet probe can collect packets communicated amongthe N micro-functions to analyze N sets of packets collectively (orseparately) and debug errors. This form of debugging requires fewersessions for packet probes to check different micro-functions therebyobviating the need to a packet probe in multiple sessions sequentiallyto investigate each sub-function as a potential root cause of error. Assuch, a test engineer can readily resolve identified errors.

In one example, a debug process has two packet-capturing logs thatrecord test data of logic flows traced from VNF1 to VNF2 to VNF3. Thetracing tool is coupled to the unified interface and has capabilities toprobe and communicate with each functional block. A packet capture fileis generated based on packets captured by the packet probe, and theunified interface enables access to the packet capture file. Thus, thetracing functionality is enhanced with a unified interface that iscommon across the sub-functions of functional blocks. As such, thetracing tool can capture packets from across numerous functional blocksand sub-functions and generate a single packet capture file thatreflects a snapshot of packets captured from across those functions. Thetest data is presented at the unified interface, which improves theoperational efficiency for debugging.

Another aspect of the disclosed technologies includes a representationalstate transfer application program interface (RESTful API) based UIautomation logic for VoLTE and Rich Communication Services (RCS)communications. RESTful is an architectural style for an API that usesHTTP requests to access and use data. That data can be used to GET, PUT,POST and DELETE data types, which refers to the reading, updating,creating and deleting of operations concerning resources. Compared toVoLTE, which is a high-speed wireless communication standard for mobilephones and data terminals, RCS is a communication protocol betweenmobile carriers and between mobile phone and carrier, aiming atreplacing SMS messages with a text-message system that is richer,provides phonebook polling (for service discovery) and can transmitin-call multimedia. Examples include chat messaging and file transfers.

The disclosed technology includes automation logic for E2E packet flowvalidation and UI flow validation, which advantageously includes thelast phase of testing a new product on an IMS. The tracing tool canautomate functional testing by simulating, for example, VoLTE-to-VoLTEcommunications between HPLMN and multiple foreign and domestic VPLMNs.The validation involves automating a confirmation of a VoLTE call onboth sending and receiving devices. For example, consider a VoLTE callto a foreign VPLMN. A test operator typically makes a call manually andobserves call behavior including, for example, latency before connectionand during the call. The disclosed technology sets-up baselineexpectations and automates calls compared against baseline expectationsto detect anomalies. In addition, the tracing tool performs functionalregression that simulates VoLTE and RCS communications to improve thelast phase of testing a new product. The simulation can involvesimulating real-time text messages and real-time RCS services (e.g.,WhatsApp chat).

The automation logic implements test scripts that simulate logic flows(e.g., call flows). Examples of logic flows include LTE/IMSregistration, Wi-Fi/Wi-Fi calling, VoLTE-to-VoLTE calling, RTT-to-RTTcalling, VoLTE-to-VoWiFi calling, Call Forward Unconditional, SingleRadio Voice Call Continuity (SRVCC), and RCS one-to-one chat.

FIG. 4 is a flowchart that illustrates an example of a logic flowincluding a VoLTE-to-VoLTE call configured to verify a new product on anIMS. A test case can verify parameters for VoLTE Mobile Origination (MO)or VoLTE Mobile Termination (MT) procedures. The associated test scriptsdefine one or more preconditions including, for example, a number ofVoLTE devices hosted in a testing environment, VoLTE users being LTE/IMSregistered, a test server connecting the testing environment to a cloudsystem, and configuration file(s) that are available and up-to-date. Theillustrated VoLTE-to-VoLTE call is simulated in a robot framework forREST API automation.

At 402, the system runs a test suite to perform the VoLTE-to-VoLTE call.A test suite setup can include provisioning VNFs such as SBG, CSCF, andTAS, and performing health check procedures to ensure that associateddevices are in good condition and/or registered with the IMS registered.The system can also initiate a packet probe tool to perform packetcapture and analysis.

At 404, a check is performed to determine whether MO and MT devices haveregistered successfully with the IMS. In one example, a dialer is openedfor User-A (VoLTE-A) and User-B (VoLTE-B) and dials *#77467#. If IMSregistration is successful for both Users A and B, the VoLTE-to-VoLTEcall is made at 430, as discussed further below. If IMS registration isnot successful for either Users A and B, a recovery procedure isperformed. For example, at 406, a dialer opens for Users A and B andperforms airplane (AP) mode toggling and WiFi is disabled at 408.

At 410, a check is performed to determine a status of LTE registration.The dialer for User-A device is open and dials *#0011#. If LTEregistration is successful, IMS registration is performed at 416. If LTEregistration is unsuccessful, another recovery procedure is performed.For example, at 412, an LTE band selection operation is performed byopening a dialer for User-A, dialing *#2263#, and selecting a suitableLTE band.

At 414, a check is performed to determine whether LTE registration wassuccessful. Specifically, a dialer is opened for User-A device and*#0011# is dialed. At 416, IMS registration is performed by opening thedialer for User-A device and dialing *#77467#. At 418, a check isperformed to determine whether IMS registration was successful. If IMSregistration was successful, the system declares that the associateduser device is registered with the IMS at 420. If IMS registration wasnot successful, another recovery procedure is performed by toggling theAP mode at 422 and checks to determine whether IMS registration wassuccessful at 424. If IMS registration remains unsuccessful, the systemdeclares that the user device is not IMS registered at 426, determinesthat the test case failed at 428, and terminates the automated procedure400.

Referring back to 430, when IMS registration is successful for bothUsers A and B, the VoLTE-to-VoLTE call is made by opening the dialer forUser-A and dialing the device-B number to make call. At 432, the systemdetermines whether the call is received at device-B by User-B. If thecall is not received, the test case failed at 428, and the processterminates. If the call is received, the call is answered at 434. At436, a procedure for a conversation continues for 30-60 seconds. At 438,the system checks every 5 seconds whether the call is active or not forboth User-A and User-B. At 440, the call terminates after a 30-60 secondcall duration. After terminating the call, the test case closes, anddevices A and B are released. After releasing the devices, the packetcapture process stops and filters are applied to captured packets. Theautomation run in the test environment terminates.

At 442, the automation framework determines whether the VoLTE-to-VoLTEcall passed or failed the test case based on pass/fail criteria set atthe unified interface. The system accesses automation run resultsobtained via the packet probe to verify the E2E flow. In one example,the unified interface can obtain and present a report link to view allthe REST API operations performed for or at the devices and associatedtest results.

Unified Interface and Tracing Tool

The tracing tool enables simultaneous packet probing of multiplefunctions selected for a logic flow, and the resulting test data isviewable through the unified interface. In one example, the tracing toolis a computer program or computer hardware such as a packet captureappliance that can intercept and log traffic that routes through thenetwork or part of the network. The test data is generated in responseto a test case executed on the network. The packets of the test dataroute through the network, and the tracing tool captures the packets. Ifneeded, the tracing tool parses packets to extract parameter values(e.g., fields values), and analyzes the content relative tospecifications to generate test results that are presented on theunified interface.

The tracing tool can trace different types of logs for different networknodes. In one example, the tracing tool generates the logs. In anotherexample, the tracing tool can probe existing logs that are generatedindependent of the tracing tool. For example, the tracing tool cangenerate or analyze internal logs, network logs, or debug logs ofmultiple application nodes of the network. An internal log can includedata about parameters related to network components such as indicationsthat a component failed to connect a call for a logic flow. A networklog can include information about parameters related to events thatoccurred in an application. For example, it can contain data related tocalls to objects and attempts at authentication. A debug log can includeinformation about parameters related to errors, warnings, orinformational activity.

The tracing tool can perform a network trace that includes an entirecommunication path between devices over the network in accordance with atest case. The tracing tool can ingest, process, and index test data,which is searchable through the unified interface. These operations, andmany in-between, generate data that can be recorded in the logs. Thetracing tool can capture packets in real-time from logs of eachfunctional block or sub-function. The tracing tool captures packets andcan display them in human-readable format on the unified interface. Thetracing tool can analyze log data of multiple application nodes andsub-components (e.g., functional blocks and sub-functions). In anotherexample, the components generate logs independently, which serve asrecords of activity on the network during a test case, and the tracingtool taps into the logs to extract data for the unified interface.

The unified interface can include filters, color-coding, and otherfeatures that let a test engineer perform low level analysis of networktraffic and inspect individual packets of different functional blocksand sub-functions. When an issue is logged for an endpoint device, thetest engineer can use the unified interface to debug the issue bysimultaneously logging into each functional block or sub-functions andfind the root cause of the issue.

In one example, a test case includes a VoLTE-to-VoLTE call with one ormore logic flows on a network as illustrated in FIG. 4 . The tracingtool can inspect packets on the network to debug or verify theperformance of the network components in response to the test case.Normally, the scope of a test can include numerous and differentparameters associated with the logic flow. The type and number ofparameters can vary depending on the particular test. The tracing toolcan thus provide insights into detecting an issue, and then identifyingthe root cause or source of the issue. That is, the tracing tool canpinpoint a problem that, for example, caused the test case to fail. Incontrast, existing tools cannot pinpoint the source of an anomaly orerror among numerous functions and sub-functions of an NFV architecture.As such, a test engineer can obtain a high-level overview of networkperformance by running a test case including a call that routes throughvarious functional blocks and sub-functions. Rather than needingdifferent interfaces or separate tracing tools to view test data foreach component separately, the disclosed unified interface and tracingtool improves operational efficiency to automate generating valuableinsights.

FIG. 5 is a flowchart that illustrates a process 500 of a unifiedinterface and tracing tool for testing a new product on a virtualdistributed network. The process 500 is performed by a systemcommunicatively coupled to a telecommunications network. In one example,the new product is a wireless device with a changed configuration, and atest case is configured to test performance of an IMS relative to thewireless device with a prior configuration. In another example, the newproduct is a new software product, and a test case is configured to testthe performance of the IMS running the new software product.

At 502, the system instantiates a unified interface for atelecommunications network including an NFV architecture. The unifiedinterface can include a graphical user interface (GUI), a command lineinterface, or a backend interface. The unified interface is coupled toan IMS of the telecommunications network including multiple VNFs (e.g.,CSCF, TAS), where each VNF includes multiple component VNFs.

At 504, the system instantiates a tracing tool configured to evaluateperformance of the IMS in response to execution of a test case. The testcase includes a test script configured to test the new product on theIMS in accordance with a logic flow. The performance of the IMS is basedon packets captured concurrently from two or more component VNFs. Thetracing tool is accessible by a user through the unified interface.

The logic flow can define a path on the network including multiplevirtual functions, where the path originates at a wireless devicecorresponding to the new product and terminates at another wirelessdevice. The logic flow can include LTE/IMS registration, Wi-Fi/Wi-Ficalling, VoLTE-to-VoLTE calling, RTT-to-RTT calling, VoLTE-to-VoWiFicalling, Call Forward Unconditional procedure, Single Radio Voice CallContinuity (SRVCC) procedure, or an RCS communication.

In one example, the tracing tool includes a packet probe configured tocause the system to simultaneously probe the multiple component VNFs forthe one or more parameters in packets. The system extracts field valuesof the parameters included in the packets and determines the performanceof the IMS based on whether the field values satisfy the pass/failcriteria. The packets can have different communications protocolsincluding any of Session Initiation Protocol (SIP), Domain Name Service(DNS) protocol, Diameter protocol, Signaling System 7 (SS7) protocol, orHypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP).

At 506, the system causes execution of the test script including captureand analysis of packets from the two or more component VNFs. The testcase includes pass/fail criteria for one or more parameters extractedfrom packets of the two or more component VNFs. The pass/fail criteriacan be input to the unified interface.

In one example, the system parses packets to extract values for theparameters, and then generates the test results based on a comparison ofthe extracted values with expected values for the parameters. The testresults indicate a root cause of an error as one of the two or morecomponent VNFs. In another example, the system traces log data of a VNFindicative of the performance of the IMS. In one example, the log dataincludes data related to network components, events that occurred in anetwork application, and errors or warnings.

At 508, in response to completing the test case, the system reports testresults indicating the performance of the IMS relative to the pass/failcriteria. For example, the system can detect activity data of a virtualnode based on values of the one or more parameters and then identify,based on the activity data, a virtual component of the virtual node as aroot cause of an anomaly. The test results are presented through theunified interface. In one example, the system generates a common fileincluding the test data of the two or more component VNFs, where thecommon file is accessible via the unified interface. In another example,the system detects anomalous activity of the IMS based on the testresults and identifies a component VNF of the CSCF or the TAS as a rootcause of the anomalous activity.

Unified Query Tool

The disclosed technology includes a unified query tool that isaccessible by a user through the unified interface. The unified querytool enables querying for subscriber information associated with one ormore anchor points (e.g., connection points) on a telecommunicationsnetwork. For example, a VNF (e.g., VNF 212) has several virtualcomponents (e.g., VNF1, VNF2, VNF3). A call of the subscriber's wirelessdevice on the network has one and only one virtual component per VNFdesignated as an anchor point for the subscriber.

The unified query tool can identify a subscriber's anchor point(s) toretrieve subscriber-specific information. As such, the unified interfacecan be used to debug a call path to identify a faulty virtual componentas the root cause of issues specifically experienced by the subscriber.In one example, the unified query tool receives a subscriber identifiersuch as a phone number as an input to identify the anchor point andcheck how a virtual component is behaving relative to the subscriber.The content of the query can map the subscriber identifier to keyinformation including a subscriber ID and session ID, which maps tomatching anchor point(s).

The unified query tool can use the key information to search any numberof the functional blocks for sub-functions of a logic flow for anchorpoint(s). Specifically, the unified interface can replicate a singlequery across multiple functional components to simultaneouslyinterrogate for subscriber information. The unified query tool enablessearching different parameter types across the different functionalblocks or sub-functions to efficiently troubleshoot a subscriber'sexperience on the network.

To find parameter data in logs, the unified interface can match aparameter identifier in log data. With the parameter identifier, a testengineer can analyze logs of functions for subscriber informationthrough the unified interface. In one example, the tracing tool cancapture log entries of each of three logs at each application node. Ifan anomaly is logged, then the unified query tool can be used to debugthe anomaly by querying each application node to pinpoint the root causeof the anomaly.

FIG. 6 is a flowchart that illustrates a process 600 of a unified querytool for querying a virtual network for subscriber information. Theprocess 600 is performed by a system communicatively coupled to atelecommunications network.

At 602, the system instantiates a unified query tool for atelecommunications network including an NFV architecture, which includesdistributed VNFs having multiple instances of a virtual componentfunction (e.g., multiple component VNFs). In one example, the first VNFincludes a CSCF and the second VNF includes a TAS of an IMS.

At 604, the system receives a query including key information indicativeof a subscriber or a session on the telecommunications network. In oneexample, the system instantiates the unified interface enabling accessby the unified query tool to the distributed VNFs, where the unifiedinterface is configured to receive the query as user input and outputthe results data in response to the query.

The key information includes an identifier of a wireless deviceassociated with the subscriber or the session. The query is associatedwith a logic flow that traverses a first VNF and a second VNF. In oneexample, the logic flow models an LTE/IMS registration, Wi-Fi/Wi-Ficalling, VoLTE-to-VoLTE calling, RTT-to-RTT calling, VoLTE-to-VoWiFicalling, Call Forward Unconditional procedure, SRVCC procedure, or anRCS communication.

At 606, the system identifies a first virtual component function of thefirst VNF as a first anchor point for the subscriber or the session. Thefirst anchor point is identified based on the key information. In oneexample, the system can simultaneously send copies of the query tomultiple VNFs. As such, the query is sent to each of the sequence of thevirtual network functions to identify a virtual component function basedon matching the key information with data associated with the particularvirtual component function.

There is usually only one anchor point per VNF. For example, the logicflow can traverse a third VNF and, as such, the system identifies asecond virtual component function of the second VNF as a second anchorpoint and a third virtual component function of the third VNF as a thirdvirtual function. The second anchor point and the third anchor point areidentified based on the key information.

At 608, the system retrieves results data of the first virtual componentfunction. The results data satisfies the query and indicates behavior ofthe first virtual component function relative to the subscriber or thesession. In one example, the system generates a common file includingthe results data obtained from the multiple VNFs and causes the unifiedinterface to access the common file and present the results data.

In one example, the system captures packets generated by the firstvirtual component and a second virtual component of the second VNF. Thesystem generates the results data based on a comparison of actualparameter data extracted from the captured packets with expectedparameter data. The captured packets can have different protocolsincluding any of SIP, DNS, Diameter, SS7, or HTTP. The system cangenerate the results data based on a comparison of actual parameter dataextracted from the captured packets with expected parameter data.

In another example, the system identifies a second virtual componentfunction of the second VNF as a second anchor point for the subscriberor the session. The second anchor point is identified based on the keyinformation and the system retrieves results data of the second virtualcomponent function that also satisfies the query. The results dataindicates behavior of the second virtual component function relative tothe subscriber or the session.

The logic flow can model a test case on the telecommunications networkfor a new product. As such, the system can generate test data indicativeof whether the first virtual component causes an issue for the newproduct. In another example, the system can capture packets generated bythe first virtual component and parse the packets to extract fieldvalues, where the results data includes the extracted field values. Inanother example, the system can query log data of the first virtualcomponent for data regarding a state of a network component, an eventthat occurred at a network application, or an indication of an error orwarning. In another example, the system can retrieve, from the firstvirtual component, test data indicative of whether the first virtualcomponent passed the test case. In one example, the new product is awireless device with a changed configuration and the test case isconfigured to test whether the first virtual component caused an issuefor the wireless device with the changed configuration. In anotherexample, the system can retrieve, from the first virtual component, testdata indicative of whether the first virtual component passed the testcase. In another example, the new product is a software program and thetest case tests the telecommunications network running the softwareprogram.

Simulated Enhanced Calling or Messaging Communications Services

The disclosed technology includes an automation engine that automatestests for different types of services such as VoLTE and RCScommunications. In one example, components between endpoint devices andthat support the service are validated, such as the RCS servers at eachendpoint and a chat service itself. In another test case, the endpointdevices are also validated. The automation engine simulates services tovalidate the functionality of those services. The simulations can enablevalidating network flows or user equipment (UE).

The automation engine simulates VoLTE and RCS services to improvetesting procedures. When a network product (e.g., device) is developedor changed (e.g., udpated configuration), phases of testing includefunctional testing as describe earlier and regression testing thatfocuses on determining how changes in a product affect the performanceof the network components. In regression testing, a partial or fullselection of tests that have been already executed are run again.Successful regression testing ensures that the new product still worksafter changes were made, whereas successful functional testing ensuresusability, accessibility, and requirement testing.

As such, the disclosed technology automates the validation for testingin E2E packet flow of RCS service testing or VoLTE service. In oneexample, a RESTful API (representational state transfer applicationprogram interface) based E2E IMS packet flow validation procedureincluding packet parsing and automation logic for VoLTE and RCSservices. E2E communications occur between interfaces of each node of anetwork. For example, packets of a first protocol are exchanged betweentwo nodes and counterpart packets between other nodes are of a secondprotocol different from the first protocol. A test case can designatedifferent classes of packets such as mandatory and conditionalparameters. The mandatory parameters can be required to pass a testwhereas the conditional parameters are optional. The validation caninclude evaluating protocol-specific values for different protocols usedby network nodes to communicate with each other.

For example, consider a VoLTE call to a foreign VPLMN (Visited PublicLand Mobile Network). A test operator typically makes a call manuallyand observes call behavior including, for example, latency for theconnection and call duration. Instead, the disclosed technologyautomates RCS or VoLTE service testing in an E2E packet flow. Forexample, baseline expectations are set based on manual observation. Thetechnology then simulates VoLTE-to-VoLTE communications between HPLMNand multiple foreign and domestic VPLMNs. The simulation can includereal-time text messages and real-time RCS services (e.g., WhatsAppchat). The results data are compared against baseline expectations forfeatures such as call duration. The validation involves automating aconfirmation of a VoLTE call duration on both the sending and receivingdevices.

FIG. 7 is a flowchart that illustrates a process 700 for testing a newproduct based on a simulated enhanced calling or messagingcommunications service. In one example, the new product is a wirelessdevice with a changed configuration, and a test case tests performanceof a sequence of network nodes. In another example, the new product is anew software program and the test case tests performance of the sequenceof network nodes running the new software program. The process 700 isperformed by a system communicatively coupled to a telecommunicationsnetwork. In one example, the system can evaluate the new productrelative to an NFV architecture for an IMS of the telecommunicationsnetwork including multiple VNFs, and identify a virtual component of aVNF as a root cause of failing the test case of the new product.

At 702, the system configures a test case including a test script thatvalidates a new product based on the enhanced calling or messagingcommunications service. The test script has a logic flow forcommunications through a sequence of network nodes over thetelecommunications network. The test case includes pass/fail criteriafor parameter data extracted from packets communicated between thesequence of network nodes in accordance with the logic flow.

The logic flow can include LTE/IMS registration, Wi-Fi/Wi-Fi calling,VoLTE-to-VoLTE calling, RTT-to-RTT calling, VoLTE-to-VoWiFi calling,Call Forward Unconditional procedure, Single Radio Voice Call Continuity(SRVCC) procedure, or an RCS communication. In an example, the sequenceof network nodes includes a CSCF and a TAS of the IMS. As such, thesystem can detect anomalous activity of the IMS based on the testresults and identify the CSCF or the TAS as a root source of theanomalous activity.

At 704, the system initiates an automation engine configured to executethe test script in accordance with the logic flow and validate the newproduct on the telecommunications network based on actual parameter dataextracted from the packets relative to the pass/fail criteria. Thepass/fail criteria can include mandatory and optional parameters forvalidating the test case, a threshold value for a tolerable differencebetween an actual parameter value and an expected parameter value, and athreshold time range for packets in the sequence of the of networknodes.

At 706, the system simulates the enhanced calling or messagingcommunications service on the telecommunications network. The simulatedservice is utilized by the new product. In one example, the enhancedcalling or messaging communications service includes a VoLTE-to-VoLTEservice, the logic flow includes a VoLTE-to-VoLTE call flow, and the newproduct includes a wireless device with a changed configuration. Inanother example, the new product includes software supported by one ormore of the network nodes. In another example, the logic flow defines acall flow that traverses a sequence of VNFs of an IMS and the capturedpackets from different interfaces have different protocols including anyof SIP, DNS, Diameter, SS7, or HTTP.

At 708, the system instantiates a network probe configured to capturethe packets of the network nodes during the simulation of the enhancedcalling or messaging communications service and extract the actualparameter data from the captured packets. In one example, the packetsare captured at interfaces of the network nodes. In one example, thesystem captures different types of packets at respective interfaces ofthe sequence of network nodes including SIP, DNS, Diameter, SS7, or HTTPpackets.

At 710, the system compares the parameter data from the captured packetsto expected parameter data defined for the test case to generate testresults relative to the pass/fail criteria. In one example, the systemcompares the parameter data to pass/fail criteria of the test case. Thepass/fail criteria include mandatory and optional parameters, athreshold value for a tolerable difference between an actual andexpected parameter values, and a threshold time range for a packetcaptured from the sequence of network nodes. The system can compare atimestamp of a captured packet to an expected time for the capturedpacket in accordance with the logic flow. A difference between thetimestamp for the captured packet and a corresponding the expected timeis compared to a pass/fail criterion to validate the new product.

At 712, the system presents an indication that the new product passed orfailed the test case based on the test results. Another example of theenhanced calling or messaging communications includes an RCS servicethat is simulated on a telecommunications network. Examples of the RCSservice includes a one-to-one chat service. The parameter data caninclude timestamp values for messages communicated by the RCS servers.As such, the system can configure a test case including a test scriptthat validates a new product based on the RCS service. The test scriptis configured to simulate the RCS service between RCS servers forrespective endpoint devices. The test case includes pass/fail criteriafor parameter data associated with communications between the RCSservers.

The system initiates an automation engine configured to simulate the RCSservice in accordance with the test script and instantiates a networkprobe configured to capture packets from the RCS servers generatedduring simulation of the RCS service and extract actual parameter datafrom the captured packets. The system compares the actual parameter datawith expected parameter data to generate test data for the new product,and validates the new product based on whether the test data satisfiesthe pass/fail criteria.

The system can simulate communications between RCS servers in accordancewith a logic flow. The logic flow defines types of packets andrespective content. The new product is validated based on whether thetypes of packets or the content match expected types of packets orexpected content. Thus, the test case can be configured to testperformance of the RCS servers for a changed configuration of a wirelessdevice or to test performance of the RCS servers running the softwareprogram.

Computer System

FIG. 8 is a block diagram that illustrates an example of a computersystem 800 in which at least some operations described herein can beimplemented. As shown, the computer system 800 can include: one or moreprocessors 802, main memory 806, non-volatile memory 810, a networkinterface device 812, video display device 818, an input/output device820, a control device 822 (e.g., keyboard and pointing device), a driveunit 824 that includes a storage medium 826, and a signal generationdevice 830 that are communicatively connected to a bus 816. The bus 816represents one or more physical buses and/or point-to-point connectionsthat are connected by appropriate bridges, adapters, or controllers.Various common components (e.g., cache memory) are omitted from FIG. 8for brevity. Instead, the computer system 800 is intended to illustratea hardware device on which components illustrated or described relativeto the examples of the figures and any other components described inthis specification can be implemented.

The computer system 800 can take any suitable physical form. Forexample, the computing system 800 can share a similar architecture asthat of a server computer, personal computer (PC), tablet computer,mobile telephone, game console, music player, wearable electronicdevice, network-connected (“smart”) device (e.g., a television or homeassistant device), AR/VR systems (e.g., head-mounted display), or anyelectronic device capable of executing a set of instructions thatspecify action(s) to be taken by the computing system 800. In someimplementation, the computer system 800 can be an embedded computersystem, a system-on-chip (SOC), a single-board computer system (SBC) ora distributed system such as a mesh of computer systems or include oneor more cloud components in one or more networks. Where appropriate, oneor more computer systems 800 can perform operations in real-time, nearreal-time, or in batch mode.

The network interface device 812 enables the computing system 800 tomediate data in a network 814 with an entity that is external to thecomputing system 800 through any communication protocol supported by thecomputing system 800 and the external entity. Examples of the networkinterface device 812 include a network adaptor card, a wireless networkinterface card, a router, an access point, a wireless router, a switch,a multilayer switch, a protocol converter, a gateway, a bridge, bridgerouter, a hub, a digital media receiver, and/or a repeater, as well asall wireless elements noted herein.

The memory (e.g., main memory 806, non-volatile memory 810,machine-readable medium 826) can be local, remote, or distributed.Although shown as a single medium, the machine-readable medium 826 caninclude multiple media (e.g., a centralized/distributed database and/orassociated caches and servers) that store one or more sets ofinstructions 828. The machine-readable (storage) medium 826 can includeany medium that is capable of storing, encoding, or carrying a set ofinstructions for execution by the computing system 800. Themachine-readable medium 826 can be non-transitory or comprise anon-transitory device. In this context, a non-transitory storage mediumcan include a device that is tangible, meaning that the device has aconcrete physical form, although the device can change its physicalstate. Thus, for example, non-transitory refers to a device remainingtangible despite this change in state.

Although implementations have been described in the context of fullyfunctioning computing devices, the various examples are capable of beingdistributed as a program product in a variety of forms. Examples ofmachine-readable storage media, machine-readable media, orcomputer-readable media include recordable-type media such as volatileand non-volatile memory devices 810, removable flash memory, hard diskdrives, optical disks, and transmission-type media such as digital andanalog communication links.

In general, the routines executed to implement examples herein can beimplemented as part of an operating system or a specific application,component, program, object, module, or sequence of instructions(collectively referred to as “computer programs”). The computer programstypically comprise one or more instructions (e.g., instructions 804,808, 828) set at various times in various memory and storage devices incomputing device(s). When read and executed by the processor 802, theinstruction(s) cause the computing system 800 to perform operations toexecute elements involving the various aspects of the disclosure.

REMARKS

The terms “example”, “embodiment” and “implementation” are usedinterchangeably. For example, reference to “one example” or “an example”in the disclosure can be, but not necessarily are, references to thesame implementation; and, such references mean at least one of theimplementations. The appearances of the phrase “in one example” are notnecessarily all referring to the same example, nor are separate oralternative examples mutually exclusive of other examples. A feature,structure, or characteristic described in connection with an example canbe included in another example of the disclosure. Moreover, variousfeatures are described which can be exhibited by some examples and notby others. Similarly, various requirements are described which can berequirements for some examples but no other examples.

The terminology used herein should be interpreted in its broadestreasonable manner, even though it is being used in conjunction withcertain specific examples of the invention. The terms used in thedisclosure generally have their ordinary meanings in the relevanttechnical art, within the context of the disclosure, and in the specificcontext where each term is used. A recital of alternative language orsynonyms does not exclude the use of other synonyms. Specialsignificance should not be placed upon whether or not a term iselaborated or discussed herein. The use of highlighting has no influenceon the scope and meaning of a term. Further, it will be appreciated thatthe same thing can be said in more than one way.

Unless the context clearly requires otherwise, throughout thedescription and the claims, the words “comprise,” “comprising,” and thelike are to be construed in an inclusive sense, as opposed to anexclusive or exhaustive sense; that is to say, in the sense of“including, but not limited to.” As used herein, the terms “connected,”“coupled,” or any variant thereof means any connection or coupling,either direct or indirect, between two or more elements; the coupling orconnection between the elements can be physical, logical, or acombination thereof. Additionally, the words “herein,” “above,” “below,”and words of similar import can refer to this application as a whole andnot to any particular portions of this application. Where contextpermits, words in the above Detailed Description using the singular orplural number may also include the plural or singular numberrespectively. The word “or” in reference to a list of two or more itemscovers all of the following interpretations of the word: any of theitems in the list, all of the items in the list, and any combination ofthe items in the list. The term “module” refers broadly to softwarecomponents, firmware components, and/or hardware components.

While specific examples of technology are described above forillustrative purposes, various equivalent modifications are possiblewithin the scope of the invention, as those skilled in the relevant artwill recognize. For example, while processes or blocks are presented ina given order, alternative implementations can perform routines havingsteps, or employ systems having blocks, in a different order, and someprocesses or blocks may be deleted, moved, added, subdivided, combined,and/or modified to provide alternative or sub-combinations. Each ofthese processes or blocks can be implemented in a variety of differentways. Also, while processes or blocks are at times shown as beingperformed in series, these processes or blocks can instead be performedor implemented in parallel, or can be performed at different times.Further, any specific numbers noted herein are only examples such thatalternative implementations can employ differing values or ranges.

Details of the disclosed implementations can vary considerably inspecific implementations while still being encompassed by the disclosedteachings. As noted above, particular terminology used when describingfeatures or aspects of the invention should not be taken to imply thatthe terminology is being redefined herein to be restricted to anyspecific characteristics, features, or aspects of the invention withwhich that terminology is associated. In general, the terms used in thefollowing claims should not be construed to limit the invention to thespecific examples disclosed herein, unless the above DetailedDescription explicitly defines such terms. Accordingly, the actual scopeof the invention encompasses not only the disclosed examples, but alsoall equivalent ways of practicing or implementing the invention underthe claims. Some alternative implementations can include additionalelements to those implementations described above or include fewerelements.

Any patents and applications and other references noted above, and anythat may be listed in accompanying filing papers, are incorporatedherein by reference in their entireties, except for any subject matterdisclaimers or disavowals, and except to the extent that theincorporated material is inconsistent with the express disclosureherein, in which case the language in this disclosure controls. Aspectsof the invention can be modified to employ the systems, functions, andconcepts of the various references described above to provide yetfurther implementations of the invention.

Related concepts are described in related applications including U.S.patent application Ser. No. 17/334,625, titled “Unified Query Tool forNetwork Function Virtualization Architecture,” filed May 28, 2021, andU.S. patent application Ser. No. 17/334,640, titled “Product ValidationBased on Simulated Enhanced Calling or Messaging Communications Servicesin Telecommunications Network,” filed May 28, 2021,” each of which areincorporated by reference in their entireties for all purposes.

To reduce the number of claims, certain implementations are presentedbelow in certain claim forms, but the applicant contemplates variousaspects of an invention in other forms. For example, aspects of a claimcan be recited in a means-plus-function form or in other forms, such asbeing embodied in a computer-readable medium. A claim intended to beinterpreted as a mean-plus-function claim will use the words “meansfor.” However, the use of the term “for” in any other context is notintended to invoke a similar interpretation. The applicant reserves theright to pursue such additional claim forms in either this applicationor in a continuing application.

The invention claimed is:
 1. At least one computer-readable storagemedium, excluding transitory signals and carrying instructions, which,when executed by at least one data processor of a system, cause thesystem to: instantiate a unified interface for a telecommunicationsnetwork including a Network Function Virtualization (NFV) architecture,wherein the unified interface is coupled to an IP multimedia subsystem(IMS) of the telecommunications network including multiple VirtualNetwork Functions (VNFs) of the NFV architecture, and wherein each ofthe multiple VNFs includes multiple component VNFs; instantiate atracing tool configured to evaluate performance of the IMS in responseto execution of a test case, wherein the test case includes a testscript configured to test a computing product on the IMS in accordancewith a logic flow, wherein the performance of the IMS is based onpackets captured concurrently from two or more of the multiple componentVNFs, and wherein the tracing tool is accessible by a user through theunified interface; cause execution of the test script including captureand analysis of packets from the two or more of the multiple componentVNFs, wherein the test case includes pass/fail criteria for one or moreparameters extracted from packets of the two or more of the multiplecomponent VNFs, and wherein the pass/fail criteria are input to theunified interface; in response to completing the test case, report testresults indicating the performance of the IMS relative to the pass/failcriteria, wherein the test results are presented through the unifiedinterface.
 2. The at least one computer-readable storage medium of claim1, wherein to capture and analyze the packets comprises causing thesystem to: parse the packets to extract values for the one or moreparameters; generate the test results based on a comparison of theextracted values with expected values for the one or more parameters,wherein the test results indicate a root cause of an error as one of thetwo or more of the multiple component VNFs.
 3. The at least onecomputer-readable storage medium of claim 1, wherein to capture andanalyze the packets comprises causing the system to: trace log data of aVNF indicative of the performance of the IMS, wherein the log dataincludes data related to network components, events that occurred in anetwork application, and errors or warnings.
 4. The at least onecomputer-readable storage medium of claim 1, wherein the system isfurther caused to: generate a common file including the test data of thetwo or more component VNFs of the multiple VNFs, wherein the common fileis accessible via the unified interface, and wherein the unifiedinterface includes a graphical user interface (GUI), a command lineinterface, or a backend interface.
 5. The at least one computer-readablestorage medium of claim 1, wherein the multiple VNFs include a CallSession Control Function (CSCF) and a Telephony Application Server (TAS)of the IMS, the system being further caused to: detect anomalousactivity of the IMS based on the test results; and identify a componentVNF of the CSCF or the TAS as a root cause of the anomalous activity. 6.The at least one computer-readable storage medium of claim 1, whereinthe tracing tool include a packet probe configured to cause the systemto: simultaneously probe the multiple component VNFs for the one or moreparameters in the packets; extract field values of the one or moreparameters included in the packets; and determine the performance of theIMS based on whether the field values satisfy the pass/fail criteria,wherein the packets conform to different communications protocols. 7.The at least one computer-readable storage medium of claim 1, wherein:the logic flow traverses a sequence of VNFs, and the captures packetshave different protocols including any of Session Initiation Protocol(SIP), Domain Name Service (DNS) protocol, Diameter protocol, SignalingSystem 7 (SS7) protocol, or Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP).
 8. Theat least one computer-readable storage medium of claim 1, wherein thelogic flow includes LTE/IMS registration, Wi-Fi/Wi-Fi calling,VoLTE-to-VoLTE calling, RTT-to-RTT calling, VoLTE-to-VoWiFi calling,Call Forward Unconditional procedure, Single Radio Voice Call Continuity(SRVCC) procedure, or an RCS communication.
 9. The at least onecomputer-readable storage medium of claim 1, wherein the computingproduct is a wireless device with a changed configuration, and whereinthe test case is configured to test the performance of the IMS relativeto the wireless device with a prior configuration.
 10. The at least onecomputer-readable storage medium of claim 1, wherein the computingproduct is a new software product, and wherein the test case isconfigured to test the performance of the IMS running the new softwareproduct.